W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-desc@w3.org > June 2006

Re: Extensions and Import/Include

From: Roberto Chinnici <Roberto.Chinnici@Sun.COM>
Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2006 11:46:44 -0700
To: Jonathan Marsh <jmarsh@microsoft.com>
Cc: Arthur Ryman <arthur.ryman@gmail.com>, www-ws-desc@w3.org
Message-id: <4489C214.2070308@sun.com>

You just mentioned the word!  :-)

Building a component model is a function of a WSDL document and a set
of extensions.


Jonathan Marsh wrote:
> This is a good answer to my concern.  Thanks for thinking this through
> so clearly!
> Do you think we need to state in the spec that building a component
> model is a function of the WSDL provided, plus the set of extensions the
> processor understands, without mentioning the dreaded "processor" word?
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org]
> On
>> Behalf Of Arthur Ryman
>> Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 5:00 AM
>> To: www-ws-desc@w3.org
>> Subject: Extensions and Import/Include
>> I've had further thoughts on the interaction between extensions and
>> the import/include mechanism. Jonathan asked if the WS-A extension
>> would violate my proposed restrictions. I don' t think is does because
>> of the recent "clarifications" about how extensions work.
>> I had assumed that the presence of an extension was triggered by the
>> content of a document. This is wrong since we agreed that an extension
>> was in effect whether or not a document actually contained any markup
>> from it's namespace. For example, if you claim that a component model
>> conforms to the wsdlx extension then ALL operations have a {safety}
>> property whether or the wsdlx:safe attribute is present.
>> Therefore it is fine for WS-A to add properties to components even if
>> there is no markup in those components (e.g. Interface components).
>> This doesn't violate the import/include restriction because you get
>> the same properties added whether or not a component is brought in via
>> import/include or is defined in the document. The extension is present
>> globally and uniformly throughout the component model. A processor can
>> therefore read (and optionally cache) each document exactly once and
>> then assemble them into the full component model instance.
>> This implies that we can't just talk about component models. We have
>> to talk about extended component models, i.e. the core component model
>> plus a set of extensions. The presence of extensions is independent of
>> the document content and therefore we have to specify which extensions
>> are present when we consider the validity of a component model
>> instance.
>> -- Arthur
Received on Friday, 9 June 2006 18:47:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:54:59 UTC